Vulnerability of specialty crops to short-term climaticvariability and adaptation strategiesin the Midwestern USA

Erica Kistner1 & Olivia Kellner2 & Jeffrey Andresen3&

Dennis Todey1& Lois Wright Morton4

Received: 24 January 2017 /Accepted: 21 August 2017 /Published online: 22 September 2017# The Author(s) 2017. This article is an open access publication

Abstract While the Midwestern USA ranks among the world’s most important corn-soybeanproduction regions, the area also produces a variety of high-value specialty crops. These cropsare an important component of the region’s rural economy with an estimated value of $1.8billion in 2012. More profitable per-acre than many row crops, specialty crops also have higherproduction-related risks. They are generally more sensitive to climatic stressors and requiremore comprehensive management compared to traditional row crops. Temperature and pre-cipitation fluctuations across the Midwest directly impact specialty crop production quantityand quality and indirectly influence the timing of crucial farm operations and the economicimpacts of pests, weeds, and diseases. Increasingly variable weather and climate change pose aserious threat to specialty crop production in the Midwest. In this article, we assess howclimate variability and observed climatic trends are impacting Midwestern specialty cropproduction using USDA Risk Management Agency data. In addition, we review current trendsin grower perceptions of risks associated with a changing climate and assess sustainableadaptation strategies. Our results indicate that weather-induced losses vary by state withexcessive moisture resulting in the highest total number of claims across all Midwestern statesfollowed by freeze and drought events. Overall, specialty crop growers are aware of the

Climatic Change (2018) 146:145–158DOI 10.1007/s10584-017-2066-1

This article is part of a Special Issue on ‘Vulnerability Assessment of US Agriculture and Forests developed bythe USDA Climate Hubs’ edited by Jerry L. Hatfield, Rachel Steele, Beatrice van Horne, and William Gould.

Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-017-2066-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

* Erica Kistnererica.kistner@ars.usda.gov

1 USDA Midwest Climate Hub, Ames, IA 50011, USA2 Illinois State Water Survey, Champaign, IL 61820, USA3 Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA4 Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA

increased production risk under a changing climate and have identified the need for crop-specific weather, production, and financial risk management tools and increased crop insur-ance coverage.

1 Introduction

Commonly known for its role as a primary producer of grains and oilseed crops, theMidwestern USA (defined as Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio,and Wisconsin) is also home to a wide variety of specialty crops that accounted for just under$2 billion of total farm gate value in 2012 (USDA-NASS 2015). Major crops produced in theregion include both long-lived perennial species such as tree fruit and nuts as well as a widevariety of spring-planted annuals. While these crops are grown on only 0.6% of the region’scropland, they account for 2.7% of its crop-related market value (USDA-NASS 2015).However, these high-value crops require more stringent management than traditional rowcrops and are more sensitive to climatic stressors (Walthall et al. 2012). Regional changes intemperature and precipitation are already directly impacting specialty crop production via cropquantity and quality, as well as indirectly influencing the timing of crucial farm operations. Inaddition, projected climatic changes in this region are expected to further impact managementdecisions and productivity of a wide range of specialty crops grown in the Midwest. This paperfocuses on our current understanding of the vulnerabilities in Midwestern specialty cropproduction under a changing climate, an analysis of USDA Risk Management Agency Causeof Loss Data for specialty crops in this region, and potential adaptation strategies. Additionally,we review grower perceptions of production risks associated with an increasingly variableclimate and assess their adaptive capacity under future climate projections.

More than 30 primary specialty crops produced in the region are operationallymonitored by the National Agricultural Statistics Service (Fig. 1). In contrast to theregion’s corn and soybean production, which tend to be associated with deep soils withrelatively high organic matter content and water-holding capacities, most specialty cropproduction tends to be concentrated in areas with relatively lighter, coarse-textured soilssuch as the central sands area of central Wisconsin, the Illinois River Valley in centralIllinois, and the fruit-belt region of western Lower Michigan (Supplemental Fig. S.1).Soils with greater hydraulic conductivity are preferable for specialty crop production dueto relatively rapid drainage rates and high trafficability characteristics (USDA-NRCS2006). Consequently, most of the specialty crops are irrigated, with just under 1.1 millionirrigated acres on farms with specialty crops in 2012 (USDA-NASS 2015). Many of thecrops are grown in proximity to the Great Lakes which modify regional climate byreducing temperature extremes, delaying bloom in the spring and reducing risk of freezedamage (Andresen and Winkler 2009).

By acreage, the five most widely grown specialty crops (in descending order) are sweetcorn, green peas, potatoes, snap beans, and popcorn. By market value, the five largest areapples, potatoes, sweet corn, cranberries, and blueberries (USDA-NASS 2015). The areainvolved in the production of specialty crops increased slightly from 646,841 acres in 2009to 747,480 acres in 2014, which is similar to overall percentage changes in cropland in theregion. At the same time, the cash market value increased from $1.62 billion to $1.78 billion(USDA-NASS 2015). Factors associated with these changes include increases in agro-tourism,the farm-to-table movement for non-genetically modified produce, and the introduction of

146 Climatic Change (2018) 146:145–158

international competitors driven by the 1994 WTO agreements and growing concern ofgenetically modified (GM) crops (Veeck et al. 2006).

Specialty crops typically require more intensive management than row crops. Productquality, as well as quantity, is a critical factor. However, they are potentially more profitablefor farmers. Unfortunately, specialty crops are also more sensitive to temperature and precip-itation amounts and frequency (i.e., climatic stressors) than row crops (Walthall et al. 2012).Because they require more agronomic care and are often grown on limited acreage, these highvalues crops are more difficult to insure with crop insurance (Crane et al. 2010). Reducedspecialty crop yields have been a primary concern in assessing climate variability impacts.However, specialty crops also experience changes in nutrients and properties such as color,visual appeal, aroma, taste, and texture during stressful climatic conditions (Ahmed and Stepp2016). It is these product quality characteristics that influence consumer purchasing decisionsand willingness to pay premium prices. Thus, the climatic sensitivity of specialty crops posesproduction and economic risks to producers under projected increasing weather variability andshifts in climate.

The 3rd US National Climate Assessment reports that the Midwest observed more than a0.8 °C increase in average temperature from 1900 to 2010 with relatively more rapid warmingbeginning in the latter half of the twentieth century. From 1950 to 2010, the averagetemperature increased at twice the rate compared to the previous five decades, and from1980 to 2010, the average temperature increased three times as quickly compared to theprevious eight decades (Pryor et al. 2014). Much of the warming has been observed in warmerovernight low temperatures, with overall warming most prevalent during the winter seasoncompared to spring, summer, and fall (Pryor et al. 2014). These warming trends have led to a

Fig. 1 2003 map of continental USA showing percent of cropland acreage dedicated to fruit and vegetableproduction out of the total cropland acreage in use. From Young et al. 2007

Climatic Change (2018) 146:145–158 147

longer growing season (i.e., increased frost-free period). However, the warmer winters pro-mote plant development before the last spring freeze, resulting in earlier dormancy breaks andputting many fruit and vegetable crops at risk for spring freeze. Annual precipitation and thefrequency of heavy precipitation events have also increased over the last century, with moreprecipitation observed in the spring, which disrupts planting and crop establishment (Kunkelet al. 2012; Pryor et al. 2014). These observed changes, alongside projected changes in theMidwest climate, have placed specialty crop production at high risk for loss.

Although average temperatures in the Midwest have increased, the warming trend hasnot been uniform across the region. Consequently, specialty crop impacts associated withdrought and extreme heat events vary greatly by location, which complicates productionmanagement strategies. Research on West Coast growers experiencing excess heat anddrought have found that perceived changes in past water availability and increasedsummer temperature are influencing concern about adaptive management to climatechange (Olen et al. 2015). In an increasingly wet climate like the upper Midwest, growerconcerns are more focused on managing excess water and seasonal rather than long-termdrought. In addition, the timing of precipitation strongly influences management deci-sions such as days available for field work (e.g., soil prep, planting, harvest), weed andpest management, and spray regimes.

In the upper Midwest, a 2012 random sample survey of almost 5000 corn-soy growersrevealed that farmers have heterogeneous experiences with flooding, saturated soils, anddrought that are locale specific; and these experiences affect perceptions of risk andadaptive management practices (Morton et al. 2015). Many farmers are confident theywill be able to deal with increases in weather variability, and they support public andprivate efforts to help farmers adapt to increased variability (Arbuckle et al. 2014;Morton et al. 2015). However, very little is known about upper Midwest specialty cropgrowers’ perceptions of increasingly variable weather and the risks associated withchanging climatic conditions.

To address this shortcoming, we examined vulnerabilities of Midwestern specialtycrop production to weather and climate variability. The objectives of this assessment areto (1) determine recent trends in Midwestern specialty crop losses due to weather hazardsusing USDA Risk Management Agency data; (2) review literature on current andpredicted future climate-/weather-related vulnerabilities in this region; (3) summarizegrower perceptions of these issues; and (4) discuss possible adaptation strategies thatreduce production risks in light of a changing climate. Our assessment is limited to fruit,vegetable, and tree nut crops given that most floricultural crops in the region areproduced in partially or completely climate-controlled structures with glass or plasticcovers.

2 Assessment of recent weather-related crop disaster data

To investigate trends in Midwest specialty crop losses due to weather hazards over time, theUSDA Risk Management Agency (RMA)’s regional data from 1989 to 2015 (USDA-RMA2015) were assessed with a focus on climate-driven impacts. RMA collects and archives “Causeof Loss” data for all insured crops produced in the USA. Figure 2 presents the total annualindemnity claimed by specialty crop producers in the Midwest for the years 1989–2015. Weatherand climate-driven cause of loss from specialty crop claims include cold wet weather, cold winter,

148 Climatic Change (2018) 146:145–158

drought, excess moisture/precipitation/rain, flood, freeze, frost, hail, heat, hot wind, wind/excesswind, hurricane, and other events (e.g., snow, lightning) as well as indirect impacts that influencelosses from insects and diseases. An important caveat of this dataset is that the cause of lossassociated with each claim was self-reported by individual producers. Area-wide differences inmost frequently reportedweather hazards and ensuing crop loss claims are summarized in Table 1.

Crop insurance availability for specialty crops has increased over the last decade as a resultof the increased government assistance provided to producers in the wake of weather disasterssuch as Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy, the 2012 drought, and the growth of production inhazard-prone areas (GAO 2014). From 2000 to 2010, the value of specialty crops (fruits, nuts,vegetables, melons, greenhouse, and nursery) increased from $41.8 billion of US farm cashreceipts to $57 billion of US farm cash receipts (Collins 2012). Subsequently, a surge inspecialty crop insurance has occurred from approximately $7.5 billion in 2000 to $15.5 billionin 2015 with the largest increases in insurance covering fruits, nuts, and trees (USDA-RMA2015). However, there are still many widely produced specialty crops that are not insured.Thus, the data in Fig. 2 should not be viewed as a comprehensive summary of annual loss dueto weather hazards. Nevertheless, it is the primary data currently used to assess climaticimpacts such as drought, excess moisture, freeze events, and frost events on specialty crops.

3 Review of climate-/weather-related vulnerabilities

3.1 Drought impacts to specialty crops

Despite increased annual precipitation, several major droughts have impacted the Midwest inrecent decades (1983, 1988, 2002, and 2012). Furthermore, climate projections indicate thatlonger dry periods will occur between precipitation events across the Midwest in the future

Fig. 2 Midwestern USA annual indemnity costs for specialty crop losses due to weather and climatic eventsfrom 1989 to 2015. Gray bars highlight years with major weather and climatic events. Annual indemnity costswere summed across Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin on a per yearbasis

Climatic Change (2018) 146:145–158 149

(Hatfield et al. 2014; Mir et al. 2012; Pryor et al. 2014). Specialty crops grown across theMidwest whose quality is directly impacted by rainfall (or lack thereof) include cherries (Sekle1995), apples (Vallat et al. 2005), and grapes (Xu et al. 2011). However, drought (andcommonly concurrent warmer temperatures) (Koster et al. 2009) impacts the quality of a vastvariety of fruit and vegetable crops (Moretti et al. 2009). Unlike corn and soybean, a majorityof specialty crops are less affected by drought conditions because they are irrigated (Hogan2013). The 2012 Census of Agriculture reports that approximately 62.5% of specialty cropacres are irrigated, with approximately 48.6% of irrigated acres being orchards, followed by34.2% in vegetables (Vilsack and Reilly 2015). However, if crop water demand exceeds theavailable water supply, crop damage can result. This is most important during pollination andfruit-set time for most vegetable crops (Chatterjee and Solankey 2015). Sweet corn, anabundant specialty crop grown in the Midwest, flowers only once. If the crop is water-limited during ear filling, it will produce poor ear fill (Rubatzky and Yamaguchi 2012). Grapesare more likely to be impacted by prolonged drought because they have deeper root systems.With prolonged drought, fruit on the vines may not ripen (Maurer 2012).

3.2 Frost and freeze impacts to specialty crops

Extreme temperature fluctuations during the spring can have enormous impacts onspecialty crops. Cold temperatures infiltrated the Midwest specialty crop growing regionduring the springs of 2007 and 2012, severely damaging crops each year. Each event waspreceded by an extended period of warmer than normal temperatures that causedperennial crops to break dormancy and begin growing earlier than normal. Identifiedas a “false spring” (Marino et al. 2011), the week prior to April 5–7, 2007, saw dailyminimum temperatures in excess of 15 °C in central Missouri. This was followed by ashift in the jet stream that moved arctic air into the Central and Eastern USA for about aweek. During the event, temperatures plummeted to as cold as −7 °C resulting inagricultural losses of about $2 billion (Marino et al. 2011). Crop damage was substantialbut limited to northern Missouri and southwest Iowa where warmer temperatures theprior week resulted in loss of dormancy and vegetative growth.

During March, 2012, a persistent upper air ridging feature set up across much ofeastern two thirds of North America and led to a 3 week period of abnormally warm

Table 1 Summary of Risk Management Agency (RMA) crop loss data by state due to weather-related hazardsfrom 1989 to 2015

State Top 3 claimed weather hazards Top 3 claimed specialty crops Cumulative indemnity cost(2015 US dollars)a

Iowa Excess moisture, drought, heat Popcorn, sweet corn, potatoes $8,160,600Illinois Excess moisture, drought, heat Popcorn, green peas, sweet corn $19,268,406Indiana Excess moisture, drought, heat Popcorn, mint, tomatoes $35,125,464Michigan Freeze, frost, excess moisture Apples, grapes, peaches $160,264,695Minnesota Excess moisture, heat, drought Green peas, sweet corn, potatoes $173,367,509Missouri Excess moisture, drought, hail Popcorn, apples, potatoes $16,462,863Ohio Excess moisture, drought, freeze Popcorn, tomatoes, apples $18,286,110Wisconsin Excess moisture, drought, heat Green peas, sweet corn, cranberries $62,920,725

a Cumulative indemnity costs are summed across all claimed specialty crops and weather-related hazards from1989 to 2015 on a per state basis

150 Climatic Change (2018) 146:145–158

temperatures resulting in the warmest March on record (1895–2015 period of record) atmany locations across the Midwest (Labe et al. 2016). Overwintering vegetation acrossthe Great Lakes region broke dormancy weeks before normal, leaving it highly suscep-tible to frost or freeze damage. Near the end of March and throughout April 2012,normal temperatures returned to the region, including a series of frost and freeze events(climatological normal last freezing temperatures in the region tend to occur in late Aprilor early May). Blooms and early developing fruits were severely damaged or lost due tothe freezing temperatures. Michigan alone lost approximately 85% of their apple cropand 90% of their tart cherry crop for the year, likely the worst single weather-related lossin the 150 years tree fruit has been grown commercially in the region. The total lossinclusive of blueberries, grapes, peaches, sweet cherries, and asparagus was estimated at$209.8 million (Knudson 2012). Wisconsin also lost much of its cherry and apple crops,and Illinois experienced extensive freeze damage to its apple crop in central and northerncounties (Sigler 2012).

3.3 Excessive moisture and precipitation

Excess moisture was the costliest to specialty crops in the Midwest states of Minnesota,Wisconsin, Illinois, and Missouri from 1989 to 2015, according to USDA-RMA. It rankssecond most costly in the states of Iowa, Indiana, and Ohio. It is Minnesota’s mostcommonly claimed specialty crop hazard. Overall, Midwestern producers have claimedover $130 million in losses due to excess moisture, precipitation, or rain alone. The threeworst years were 1999, 1993, and 2001, respectively (adjusted to 2015 dollars). Twofederal disaster declarations were made that year for Minnesota due to severe ice storms,flooding, and heavy rain (FEMA 2016). During the 9 years prior to 2013, southernMinnesota experienced three 1000-year flood events (Durgan 2013). In 2015, centralIllinois (which produces 90% of the country’s canned pumpkin) received 58.9 cm of rainfrom May to July (nearly double the average). The excess moisture greatly reduced thepumpkin harvest, leading to a shortage of canned pumpkins in 2015 (Angel 2015).

3.4 Dynamic weeds, insects, and disease pressures

As temperatures and the frequency of extreme weather events continue to increase, pestoutbreaks (weeds, diseases, and insects) and subsequent economic damage to Midwesterncropping systems are expected to become more frequent and severe (Hatfield et al. 2014; Pryoret al. 2014). Over the last 50 years, warming temperatures have enabled numerous crop pestsand pathogens to expand their ranges northward thereby challenging Midwestern growers tomonitor and manage them (Bebber et al. 2013). Warming minimum winter temperatures in theMidwest benefit many insect pests by decreasing rates of overwintering mortality. In addition,rising annual temperatures may also increase the number of generations in multivoltine insectswhich in turn can greatly exacerbate the potential economic damage caused by these pests(Tobin et al. 2008). Increased spring precipitation and higher temperatures across the Midwestmay be enhancing fungal and bacterial plant pathogens (Anderson et al. 2004). For instance,outbreaks of bacterial spot, a severe bacterial pathogen of cucurbit crops linked to precipita-tion, have drastically increased across pumpkin fields in Illinois over the past decade(Ravanlou and Babadoost 2015). There is a general consensus that the impact of weeds shouldincrease under future climatic projections especially in terms of species distributions (Dukes

Climatic Change (2018) 146:145–158 151

and Mooney 1999). Furthermore, invasive weeds may be able to adapt more quickly tochanging climatic conditions within agroecosystems giving them the competitive edge overcrops in obtaining limiting resources like water, nitrogen, and light (Clements and Ditommaso2011).

3.5 Threats to pollination services

Insect pollination services are a crucial component of the US agricultural industry andare currently valued at ~$15 billion per year (Calderone 2012). Many high economicvalue specialty crops grown in the Midwest (e.g., apples, blueberries, pumpkins) aredependent on bee pollination services. Alarmingly, North American bee populations(both domestic and wild) have declined over the past two decades with rising tempera-tures emerging as key factor in declining bumble bee populations (Kerr et al. 2015; Pottset al. 2010). To further complicate matters, pollinators are vulnerable to a wide range ofpesticides whose utilization in the Midwest may rise given that crop pest impacts areexpected to increase under future climatic projections and the efficacy of pesticidesdecreases under extreme rainfall events (Hatfield et al. 2014).

4 Future projections

In the near term (and within the strategic decision time-span of many crops), similar trends andvariabilities in weather and climate are likely to continue. Longer-term projections are morevariable based on potential greenhouse gas emissions and management efforts. Overall annualaverage temperatures are expected to increase 1.9–2.8 °C by 2041–2070 relative to 1971–2000averages which suggests continued pressure on specialty crop production (Hatfield et al.2014). Projected increases in the number of days above 35 °C and warm nights will increasethe growing season length, but also introduce potentially more stressful days, particularly inthe southern part of the Midwest. Additionally, warmer nights will increase plant respirationrates and consume fixed carbon, potentially reducing yields. Warmer winters will enhancesurvival of overwintering of insects which in turn may lead to increased pest pressures (Tobinet al. 2008).

Under future climate change projection scenarios, rainfall patterns are expected toshift and become more erratic: average precipitation is expected to increase 4.1–10.2 cmby 2041–2070 relative to the 1971–2000 average precipitation. Overall, the number ofdays with heavy precipitation during this future time frame is also expected to increase,coupled with an increased number of dry days between rainfall events (Pryor et al.2014). Precipitation projections also suggest increased winter and spring seasonal totalswith reduced summer totals. This creates a double stress on specialty crop producers andtheir crops with increased spring wetness and management issues followed by driersummers. Potential summer moisture deficits could be exacerbated by increased temper-atures and longer growing seasons which increase the overall crop water use. Climaticvariability is expected to increase as well (Melillo et al. 2014). Projected climatic shiftsare also expected to lead to increased weed, disease, and insect pest pressures which,when coupled with increasing frequencies of extreme weather events, would impactmanagement decisions and productivity of a wide range of specialty crops grown inthe Midwest (Hatfield et al. 2014). Thus, future climate regimes may exacerbate

152 Climatic Change (2018) 146:145–158

management challenges more so than already witnessed in recent decades unless adap-tation and mitigation to climate variability and change is undertaken by producers.

5 Adaptation to a changing climate

5.1 Growers perceptions of threats

To assess specialty crop vulnerability and develop effective adaptation strategies, it isuseful to understand the direct and indirect impacts of weather and climate on Mid-western specialty crop production as experienced by growers. Johnson and Morton’s(2015) study of 129 Michigan and Ohio specialty crop grower leaders identified andranked production issues associated with a changing climate and extreme weatherevents. Among the nine major production impacts identified by growers in this region,pests and disease (new invasive species), marketing and risk (increased need forfinancial risk management tools), and water (increased demand for water) related issueswere ranked as their top three greatest concerns (Fig. 3). Growers also ranked thefollowing weather/climate issues as highly important: fluctuations in spring temperatureand fruit bud break; early spring warming and late frost (affects tree fruit), andexcessive rainfall in spring (affects planting dates). In addition to weather/climate directimpacts on their production systems, a number of indirect effects were identified andhighly rated: increased variability in crop quality and quantity; increased workforceinstability; and reduction in farm profitability. Overall, growers expressed a heightenedsense of increased crop risk under changing climate and extreme weather events, but

Fig. 3 Nine cluster rating map generated from Midwest specialty crop leaders’ brainstorm, rating, and sortingprocess in 2014. Growers identified 85 key climate-/weather-related issues impacting their production systems.These statements were then rated (1 = not at all important to 5 = extremely important) and mapped into nineclusters representing production issues of highest concern. Clusters with more stacked levels indicate higherrating grand means. From Johnson and Morton 2015

Climatic Change (2018) 146:145–158 153

believed there were opportunities for new approaches to plant varieties and new typesof crops as well as the potential to expand production in the Midwest due to decreasedproduction elsewhere.

5.2 Adaptation strategies

Midwestern specialty crop growers are likely to continue to experience severe crop losses due toincreasingly variable and extreme weather events. A few major impacts have been discussed here.Given the limited crop insurance coverage available to many specialty crop growers, developingappropriate adaptation and management strategies is crucial. To date, the impact of early springfreezes on perennial specialty crops have attracted themost attention (Marino et al. 2011). Irrigationsprinklers, heaters, and more recently frost fans are currently being used by Midwestern fruitgrowers to mitigate frost damage. Unfortunately, no one method is completely effective and acombination of methods is often warranted (Sigler 2013). High tunnel covers may also be a goodoption for growers in Michigan and Ohio where fruit and vegetable crop losses due to extremetemperature events are common (Carey et al. 2009). One promising new indirect strategy is theapplication of sprayed water mist early in the growing season to cool plant tissue and delayphenological development, leaving the crop less susceptible to any freezing temperatures (Rijal2017). For annual specialty crops (especially green peas and sweetcorn), losses due to excessivemoisture account for the majority of reported losses in Midwestern states with the exception ofMichigan (USDA-RMA 2015). Tile drainage is becoming a much more common practice forremoving excess water in Midwestern row crop agriculture, but it is not currently widely used inspecialty crop systems. Cover crops can help maintain soil integrity in the face of heavy rains whilesimultaneously suppressing weed establishment in vegetable cropping systems (Nair et al. 2015).

Drought and high temperatures are also major causes of reported specialty crop losses withcole crops being particularly vulnerable. Improved water management, new heat tolerantvarieties, or switching to alternative crops may be viable strategies as extreme heat eventsbecome more frequent and severe (Hatfield et al. 2014, Mir et al. 2012). While irrigationdecision-making tools are currently being developed for specialty crop systems in California(Johnson et al. 2013), such tools are more limited for Midwestern producers despite growerconcerns over water availability (Johnson and Morton 2015).

All specialty crop producers would benefit frommore accurate long-term climate and short-termweather forecasts at higher spatial resolutions. Given uncertainties regarding seasonal weatherpatterns and climate change projections at fine spatial scales, a more diversified farm may bebuffered from weather-related crop losses due to pests, diseases, and weeds (Walthall et al. 2012).For instance, a grower that plants sweet corn can more easily overcome yield losses from anunexpected outbreak of corn earworm if pumpkins are also grown. Further research is greatly neededto develop a robust toolkit of adaptationmeasures to meet the diverse needs ofMidwestern specialtycrop farmers. Unlike traditional row crops, there is often little to no tolerance for weather-inducedreductions in commodity quality which makes effective climate resilient practices all the morecritical for sustaining Midwestern specialty crop production under an increasingly variable climate.

5.3 Grower capacity for adaptation

Adaptation is the collective set of short- and longer-term grower adjustments made in response toperceived or actual conditions that they consider will affect their crops. These adjustments may bemade to avoid threats to their production system or to take advantage of new opportunities as the

154 Climatic Change (2018) 146:145–158

situation and/or resources change. Survey results from US farmers reveal that intentions to adaptto climate change are influenced by previous climate experiences and concerns about localimpacts (Haden et al. 2012; Morton et al. 2015). Further, there is evidence that the highuncertainties in long-term projections of climate at finer spatial and temporal scales can limitgrower adaptive management decisions (Howden et al. 2007). Changes in the timing of laborneeds, which influence scheduling, harvesting and processing, were concerns in the Michigan-Ohio research (Johnson and Morton 2015). Poor crop quality and quantity especially impactmigrant labor earning capacity, and crop loss from freezes and other weather events change thetiming, or in some instances, destroy the crop and eliminate the need for labor (Johnson andMorton 2015). In addition, one year’s crop loss can disrupt future availability of labor. Localexperience and context seem to be variables driving adaptive management (Haden et al. 2012).Michigan and Ohio growers identified a need for more financial and other types of flexible riskmanagement tools to help them better respond to changing weather and climate (Johnson andMorton 2015). There is a need for crop-specific research on the interaction between weathervariability and growers’ management decisions associated with those systems of production.

5.4 Knowledge gaps

Our assessment provides a snapshot of challenges facingMidwestern specialty crop production ina changing climate and grower perceptions of risks and opportunities. The RMA crop loss datawas somewhat limited for specialty crops grown in theMidwest. High-value crops not included inthis study include horseradish, asparagus, and watermelons. The survey conducted by Johnsonand Morton (2015) was comprised mainly of major specialty crop producers in the region. Astratified random sample survey of Midwest specialty crop growers is greatly needed to betterassess the current beliefs, concerns, and practices associated with a variable climate as well theresources needed to ensure specialty crop production remains viable under increasingly stressfulclimatic conditions. Improved short- and long-term weather forecasting as well as economicdecision-making tools is warranted to help producers maintain sustainable crop systems underprojected increased abiotic and biotic stressors.

Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Dr. Jerry Hatfield and Dr. Beth Hall for their initial workon specialty needs. They would like to recognize Anna Johnson for her efforts on gathering specialty cropproducer attitudes and the producers themselves for their willingness to share information about their productionissues. They thank Charlene Felkley for helpful feedback and comments. Any opinions, findings, and conclu-sions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflectthe views of the Illinois State Water Survey.

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 InternationalLicense (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and repro-duction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide alink to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

References

Ahmed S, Stepp JR (2016) Beyond yields: climate change effects on specialty crop quality and agroecologicalmanagement. Elem Sci Anth 4:000092. https://doi.org/10.12952/journal.elementa.000092

Anderson PK, Cunningham AA, Patel NG, Morales FJ, Epstein PR, Daszak P (2004) Emerging infectiousdiseases of plants: pathogen pollution, climate change and agrotechnology drivers. Trends Ecol Evol 19:535–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2004.07.021

Climatic Change (2018) 146:145–158 155

Andresen JA, Winkler JA (2009) Weather and climate. In: Schaetzl RJ, Brandt D, Darden JT (eds) Michigangeography and geology. Pearson Custom Publishing, Boston, MA, pp 288–314

Angel J (2015) The Great Pumpkin Shortage of 2015. Illinois State Climatologist: October 2015. Illinois StateWater Survey, Champaign, IL. https://climateillinois.wordpress.com/2015/10/07/the-great-pumpkin-shortage-of-2015-in-illinois/. Accessed 9 Jan 2017

Arbuckle JG, Hobbs J, Loy A, Morton LW, Prokopy LS, Tyndall J (2014) Understanding corn belt farmerperspectives on climate change to inform engagement strategies for adaptation and mitigation. J Soil WaterConserv 69:505–516. https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.69.6.505

Bebber DP, Ramotowski MA, Gurr SJ (2013) Crop pests and pathogens move polewards in a warming world.Nat Clim Chang 3:985–988. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1990

Calderone NW (2012) Insect pollinated crops, insect pollinators and US agriculture: trend analysis of aggregatedata for the period 1992–2009. PLoS One 7:e37235. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037235

Carey EE, Jett L, Lamont WJ, Nennich TT, Orzolek MD, Williams KA (2009) Horticultural crop production inhigh tunnels in the United States: a snapshot. HortTechnology 9:37–43

Chatterjee A, Solankey SS (2015) Functional physiology in drought tolerance of vegetable crops: anapproach to mitigate climate change impact. In: Choudhary ML, Patel VB, Siddiqui MA, Sharaz MS(eds) Climate dynamics in horticultural science, Principles and applications, vol 1. CRC Press, BocaRaton, pp 149–171

Clements DR, Ditommaso A (2011) Climate change and weed adaptation: can evolution of invasive plants leadto greater range expansion than forecasted? Weed Res 51:227–240. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3180.2011.00850.x

Collins K (2012) Crop insurance and specialty crops. Today Magazine. http://www.cropinsuranceinamerica.org/wp-content/uploads/Specialty-Crops-FINAL.pdf. Accessed 19 Oct 2016

Crane TA, Roncoli C, Paz J, Breuer N, Broad K, Hoogenboom G (2010) Forecast skill and farmers’ skills:seasonal climate forecasts and agricultural risk management in the southeastern United States. Wea ClimateSoc 2:44–59. https://doi.org/10.1175/2009WCAS1006.1

Dukes JS, Mooney HA (1999) Does global change increase the success of biological invaders? Trends Ecol Evol14:135–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(98)01554-7

Durgan B (2013) Seeking patterns. Mark Seeley charts Minnesota’s changing climate. University of MinnesotaExtension. Magazine of Extension research and education. Fall 2013. http://www.extension.umn.edu/source/fall-2013/docs/source-fall-2013.pdf. Accessed 1 Dec 2016

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2016) Disaster declarations for Minnesota. DR −1283 andDR-1288. https://www.fema.gov/hi/disasters/grid/state-tribal-government/57. Accessed 1 Dec 2016

Government Accountability Office (2014) Climate change: better management of exposure to potential futurelosses is needed for federal flood and crop insurance. GAO-15-28. United States Government AccountabilityOffice, Washington DC, p 48

Haden VR, Niles MT, Lubell M, Perlman J, Jackson LE (2012) Global and local concerns: what attitudes andbeliefs motivate farmers to mitigate and adapt to climate change. PLoS One 7:e52882. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052882

Hatfield J, Takle G, Grotjahn R, Holden P, Izaurralde RC, Mader T, Marshall E, Liverman D (2014) Ch. 6:Agriculture. In Melillo JM, Richmond TC, and Yohe GW (eds) Climate change impacts in the United States:the third national climate assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, pp 150–174. https://doi.org/10.7930/J02Z13FR

Hogan J (2013) Vegetable growers held their own despite 2012 drought. The County Press, 10 February 2013.http://thecountypress.mihomepaper.com/news/2013-02-10/News/Vegetable_growers_held_their_own_despite_2012_drou.html (Accessed 3 Nov 2016)

Howden SM, Soussana F, Tubiello FN, Chhetri N, Dunlop M, Meinke H (2007) Adapting agriculture to climatechange. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104:19691–19696. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0701890104

Johnson A, Morton LW (2015) Midwest climate and specialty crops: specialty crop leader views and prioritiesfor Midwest specialty crops. Sociology technical report 1039. Department of Sociology, Iowa StateUniversity, Ames, Iowa, p 22

Johnson LF, Cahn MD, Martin F, et al (2013) New tools for ET estimation and irrigation management inspecialty crops. ASABE Annual International Meeting, Paper No. 131595001. American Society ofAgricultural and Biological Engineers, St. Joseph, Michigan. https://doi.org/10.13031/aim.20131595001

Kerr JT, Pindar A, Galpern P et al (2015) Climate change impacts on bumblebees converge across continents.Science 349:177–180. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa7031

Knudson WA (2012) The economic impact of this spring’s weather on the fruit and vegetable sectors. TheStrategic Marketing Institute. Working paper 01–052012. Michigan State University. http://legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/CommitteeDocuments/House/Agriculture/Testimony/Committee1-5-30-2012.pdf. Accessed 14 Nov 2016

156 Climatic Change (2018) 146:145–158

Koster RD, Schubert SD, Suarez MJ (2009) Analyzing the concurrence of meteorological droughts and warmperiods, with implications for the determination of evaporative regime. J Clim 12:3331–3341. https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JCLI2718.1

Kunkel KE, Karl TR, Book H et al (2012) Monitoring and understanding trends in extreme storms: state of

knowledge. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 94:499–514. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00262.1Labe Z, Ault T, Zurita-Milla R (2016) Identifying anomalously early spring onsets in the CESM large ensemble

project. Clim Dyn doi. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-016-3313-2Marino GP, Kaiser DP, Gu L, Ricciuto DM (2011) Reconstruction of false spring occurrences over the

southeastern United States 1901-2007: an increasing risk of spring freeze damage? Environ Res Lett 6:024015. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/6/2/024015

Maurer A (2012) Drought stress starting to set in on specialty and produce crops. Purdue University. UniversityNews Service. 24 July 2012. https://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases/2012/Q3/drought-stress-starting-to-set-in-on-specialty-and-produce-crops.html. Accessed 3 Nov 3, 2016

Melillo JM, Richmond TC, Yohe GW (2014) Climate change impacts in the United States: The third nationalclimate assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, pp 841. https://doi.org/10.7930/J02Z13F

Mir RR, Zaman-Allah M, Sreenivasulu N, Trethowan R, Varshney RK (2012) Integrated genomic, physiologyand breeding approaches for improving drought tolerance in crops. Theor Appl Genet 125:625–645.https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-012-1904-9

Moretti CL, Mattos LM, Calbo AG, Sargent SA (2009) Climate changes and potential impacts on postharvestquality of fruit and vegetable crops: a review. Food Res Int 43:1824–1832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2009.10.013

Morton LW, Hobbs J, Arbuckle J, Loy A (2015) Upper Midwest climate variations: farmer responses to excesswater risks. J Environ Qual 44:810–822. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2014.08.0352

Nair A, Kaspar T, Nonnecke G (2015) Cover crops in vegetable production systems. Iowa State University

Extension and Outreach. HORT3026, Ames, IA, pp 7National Agricultural Statistics Service (2015) 2012 census of agriculture, specialty crops. Volume 2 subject series

part 8. AC-12-S-8. United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, p 29 https://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2012/Online_Resources/Specialty_Crops/SCROPS.pdf. Accessed 1 Oct 2016

National Resource Conservation Service (2006) NRCS fertility recommendations for irrigated specialty crops oncoarse textured soils. Illinois agronomy technical note no. 18. National Resources Conservation Service,Champaign, IL

Olen B, Wu J, Langpap C (2015) Irrigation decisions for major west coast crops: water scarcity and climaticdeterminants. Am J Ag Econ 98:254–275. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aav036

Potts SG, Biesmeijer JC, Kremen C, Neumann P, Schweiger O, Kunin WE (2010) Global pollinator declines:trends, impacts and drivers. Trends Ecol Evol 25:345–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2010.01.007

Pryor SC, D. Scavia, C. Downer, M. Gaden, L. Iverson, R. Nordstrom, J. Patz, and G. P. Robertson (2014) Ch.18: Midwest. In Melillo JM, Richmond TC, and Yohe GW (eds) Climate change impacts in the UnitedStates: The third national climate assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, pp 418–440.https://doi.org/10.7930/J0J1012N

Ravanlou A, Babadoost M (2015) Development of bacterial spot, incited by Xanthomonas cucurbitae, inpumpkin fields. Hortscience 50:714–720

Rijal I (2017). Use of water mist to protect tree fruits from spring frost damage. Dissertation. Department ofGeography, Michigan State University

Risk Management Agency (2015) Report to congress: specialty crop report. United States Department ofAgriculture, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation. United States Department of Agriculture, Washington,DC, p 20 http://www.rma.usda.gov/pubs/2015/specialtycrop.pdf. Accessed 19 Oct 2016

Rubatzky VE, Yamaguchi M (2012) Sweet corn. In: world vegetables: principles, production, and nutritivevalues, 2nd edn. Springer, New York, p 246

Sekle L (1995) Fruit cracking in sweet cherries (Prunus avium L.). Some physiological aspects-a mini review. SciHortic 63:135–141

Sigler D (2012) Spring freezes leave small crop, more questions. Fruit Growers News. 13 June 2012.http://fruitgrowersnews.com/article/spring-freezes-leave-small-crop-more-questions. Accessed 14 Nov 2016

Sigler D (2013) Protecting your fruit from frost and freeze. Fruit Growers News. 25 Jan 2013.http://fruitgrowersnews.com/article/protecting-your-fruit-from-frost-and-freeze/. Accessed 9Jan 2017

Tobin PC, Nagarkatti S, Loeb G, Saunders MC (2008) Historical and projected interactions between climate

change and insect voltinism in a multivoltine species. Glo Change Biol 14:951–957. https://doi.org/10.1111

/j.1365-2486.2008.01561.xVallat A, Gu H, Dorn S (2005) How rainfall, relative humidity and temperature influence volatile emissions from

apple trees in situ. Phytochemistry 66:1540–1550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2005.04.038

Climatic Change (2018) 146:145–158 157

Veeck G, Che D, Veeck A (2006) America’s changing farmscape: a study of agricultural tourism in Michigan.

Prof Geogr 58:235–248. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9272.2006.00565.xVilsack T, Reilly JT (2015) 2012 census of agriculture: specialty crops. Volume 2. Subject series. Part 8. AC-12S-

8. United States Department of Agriculture. National Agricultural Statistics Service, Washington DC, p 29https://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2012/Online_Resources/Specialty_Crops/SCROPS.pdf.Accessed 4 Nov 2016

Walthall CL, Hatfield J, Backlund P et al (2012) Climate change and agriculture in the United States: effects andadaptation. USDATechnical Bulletin 1935, Washington, DC, p 186

Xu C, Zhang Y, Zhu L, Huang Y, Lu J (2011) Influence of growing season on phenolic compounds andantioxidant properties of grape berries from vines grown in a subtropical climate. J Agric Food Chem 59:1078–1086. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf104157z

Young E, Johnson D, Krissoff B, Lucier G. Relaxing Fruit and Vegetable Planting Restrictions (2007) AmberWaves. https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2007/february/relaxing-fruit-and-vegetable-planting-restrictions/. Accessed 23 Jan 2017

158 Climatic Change (2018) 146:145–158